#Emili Sande | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

sirenjose · 11 months ago

Text

Analysis of White Sand Street Asylum - Part 1

Includes Full Character Analyses for: Freddy, Kreacher, Emma, Emily, Leo, Robbie and Dolores, Kurt, Ada and Emil, and Alice.

I have been forced to split this into 3 parts due to the length and number of images I've used for this. To prevent tumblr from forcing me to make this any more than 3 parts, I have cut back on the original number of images (mostly I just cut out the images of the deductions). Apologies in advance, but I hope this is still ok either way. If anything doesn't make sense, let me know.

Anyways, please enjoy~!

Robbie and Dolores were born to a “wealthy family” according to the post from Robbie’s release (https://twitter.com/IdentityVJP/status/1120251010042040320).

Their parents loved them based on Dolores’ recollection in Robbie’s 3rd letter, where they would “always give each of us a goodnight kiss before they tucked us in. And you would kiss on my cheek to wake me up in the morning”. Dolores also described their parents as “kind”, and implied their life was happy back then.

Unfortunately, this didn’t last forever. We don’t know what happened, but the White siblings lost everything, their home and their parents, in one night.

Robbie doesn’t understand what happened, though Dolores seems to, yet she is unable to explain the truth to Robbie, likely due to his young age. Dolores cares about Robbie more than anything else, who she sees as her “Precious Treasure”, but she is also hard on herself as a result and sees her inability to tell him what happened to their parents as a “failure” on her part.

As they lost both parents in 1 night, I doubt the cause of their deaths was natural. Maybe it was murder? That could match with Dolores being unable to explain that sort of concept to someone young like Robbie.

Though the fact they lost their house and seemingly all their possession and money, I wonder if there was a fire. Unless they only lost their house and possessions due to their parents’ deaths, but it could be seen as odd that their parents didn’t leave anything behind for them after their deaths or a will or anything. If they lost it all in a fire, that could be an explanation. (Though next question I wonder is if the fire was caused on purpose or accidental. Though an accidental fire could fit well enough on its own as it would provide an explanation for their parents not dying due to natural causes, dying at the same time, and how they could lose everything to become penniless orphans by the end).

After losing their parents, they are placed in White Sand Street Orphanage. This orphanage is run by Kreacher Pierson (who refers to the orphanage as “Sweet Home” or “Home, sweet home”).

Kreacher is someone who (based on his 1st letter and deduction summaries) grew up on the streets as an orphan, all on his own, from a young age. He was someone who was never “treated with sincerity and kindness”, especially not by the upper class, who were only ever disgusted by “rats” such as him. So Kreacher grew up without ever knowing love. Only hatred and disdain, causing him to learn that the only way he’d be able to survive was by relying on himself. It was a dog-eat-dog world that revolved around having enough money. He grew up learning that everyone was only ever out for themself. This is how he developed his hatred for the rich, and he decided, if they weren’t going to share any of their coins with a penniless orphan like himself, then he’d just have to take it for himself. It’s not like they needed it anyways. He saw plenty of people swimming in luxury that he’d never have. They could afford to share some with him, right?

This was how Kreacher became a thief. As a way to survive.

As we learn in his beta backstory: “Kreacher grew up in this cruel and realistic world, he followed the leader of thieves and endured various difficulties, training for a way to make a living”. He developed his skills in theft, all while becoming exceptionally “street-smart” with exceptional “survival instincts”.

No one would just give him their coin, even if he were to ask, and barely any if he begged. So, he learned to rely on deception as his only ��way of survival”. No, what he was doing wasn’t good, but it was his only way at the time to keep himself from “dying from starvation or sickness on the streets”. And as he had to rely on this from quite a young age, it became the only life he knew.

Kreacher was managing to get by, though he had been caught and arrested for theft in the past.

Not wanting to go back to prison, Kreacher decides to change his methods. After earning people’s trust by making himself seem to be a “philanthropist”, he specifically adopts disabled orphans. He planned to use the kids’ disabilities “to gain sympathy” in order to profit even more than he’d been able to before via begging and stealing alone, while at the same time using the money to provide shelter and sustenance to the kids he’d adopted.

But Kreacher was a realistic person. He was someone who just did whatever he had to do in order to survive. As a result, he could be tough with the kids, and was implied to sometimes hit some kids that didn’t make enough money. This was likely the only way Kreacher knew how to ensure the kids did better next time. He knew the world was a cruel place, something they wouldn’t be able to survive unless they toughened up. He needed to develop their survival instincts as well as teach them how to be street smart. (Maybe Kreacher is the reason the kid in Robbie’s 2nd letter knew how to pry open a locked window with a knife. Maybe Kreacher taught them other skills like that.) Though at the same time, his actions were also due to a lack of any experience with love or kindness. He’s never had an easy life. He’s likely treating them that way because that’s how he was always treated and how he’s always had to live, and as a result, he doesn’t really know how to be gentle. As we’ve said, he’s had to learn to prioritize himself above everyone to survive. He’s never had to care for someone else, and so he doesn’t know how to do so with the kids. Even if did have concern for the kids, he likely wouldn’t even understand what those feelings were. What he does understand is survival and money, and he sees Dolores as a chance to make a ”fortune” due to her disability.

Robbie’s deduction 2 describes Dolores as “a girl who lost an arm”. Losing an arm is different than being born without one, so I wonder if Dolores lost it during whatever incident killed their parents?

There are instances where burn victims can require amputation if the damage goes deep enough, if the injury becomes infected, or if the limb was crushed in some examples.

(It is possible she was simply born that way. I just find the term “lost” odd if so.)

In the photo of Kreacher with the orphan kids, we can (most likely) identify Dolores, as she is the sole girl with a missing right arm. Since Dolores came with Robbie, it’d make sense for 1 of the children in the photo with her to be Robbie. We know Robbie is younger than Dolores, so a good guess would be either the kid with the missing ear next to her or the small child sitting on the ground. It’s hard to tell with this 2nd kid, but it looks like he has both hands but is missing at least 1 leg?

Robbie (looking at his default appearance) seems to only be missing his head, while all his limbs look intact. Considering when Robbie came back, his head was still missing, I imagine his default should be accurate to showing how his body was before his death. Otherwise, if coming back did supposedly restore any missing limbs he had previously, why not also restore his head somehow (rather than leave him headless)?

In which case, my best guess is that Robbie is the kid with the missing ear. The height would also match better with Robbie’s default compared to the smaller child.

(And if Robbie was only missing an ear, that would also fit with how we don’t see anything wrong with Robbie as we wouldn’t notice a missing ear with his whole head missing.)

Also, this kid with the missing ear is standing right next to Dolores. I know this same kid isn’t directly next to her in the other photo we have of Kreacher with the orphanage kids, but he is directly opposite her, on the other side of Kreacher and Father Duke, so it’s at least close.

This kid also looks similar, even though not the exact same (the kid has both ears), as the kid on the Milk Carton accessory that came from the charity event that Robbie’s Wail skin came from.

(Nothing says this kid is definitely Robbie, I’m just suggesting every potential theory/option.)

While at White Sand Street Orphanage, Robbie and Dolores are given no choice but to work. This is in part because Kreacher, even though he is the owner, is only a poor street orphan himself.

As Dolores was missing an arm, she was made to beg because that would make it “easier to pull on the heartstrings”.

Robbie though, despite being “such a crybaby” had “nothing wrong” with him. This does make me wonder if Robbie didn’t actually have any disabilities or missing limbs or anything, and could’ve been similar to the boy in the photo on the milk carton. If he didn’t have any issues like that, it could explain the comment about Dolores being able to pull on heartstrings but not Robbie. Unless the comment was just saying there basically wasn’t enough wrong with Robbie, not enough to make him as sad of a case as Dolores, and thus he could’ve still had an issue like a missing ear?

Robbie wasn’t assigned to beg. Instead he was tasked to “work in the yard”, where “gardening became his new hobby”.

In the Christmas Nocturne event, Robbie implies he chopped down trees for firewood, using an axe that was “even bigger than Robbie”. His backstory says Dolores helped Robbie get used to his tasks in the yard. I wonder if the axe was originally hers, or if it was just an axe that Robbie was given but Dolores taught him how to use. Though Robbie’s 4th letter does describe it as “her axe”, it may have only been described that way1 as she kept and used it after Robbie’s death.

If Robbie was too young to understand what happened to his parents, I question how good he really was chopping down an entire tree. It’s possible he just chopped branches off, or maybe only chopped down small enough trees. Or they already had small enough logs and Robbie just chopped it up into firewood.

Whatever the case, Dolores always told Robbie that he did a good job, which made Robbie happy. And as we know from Robbie’s 1st deduction, Dolores basically says that Robbie’s happiness “is the suffering I longed for”. She did anything she could to make Robbie happy, her “adorable brother”.

Life at the orphanage continued until the Church decided it wanted to be involved (likely due to the desire to also profit if not for the value of the kids for their experiments). Kreacher cooperated, likely in part because they pressured him but also in part probably because they offered some kind of benefit or financial compensation if he agreed.

This continues for a time, with the church partnering with him to hold events to raise money for the kids and the orphanage. The one he often works with from the church is Father Duke.

Eventually the church decides they wanted more and had Kreacher send over kids that were “diagnosed with mental illnesses” to their “mental institution” for “comprehensive treatment”. The reasoning stated in the letter they sent to Kreacher for why they did this was “Based on the need for cooperation with the government”. Whether or not the kids actually had any mental illness didn’t matter, the church got what they wanted.

“Letter to Mr. Kreacher Pierson:

Based on the need for cooperation with the government, the orphans who have been diagnosed as mentally handicapped should be sent to the Catholic Church’s Office of Ministries for unified care. For the well-being of the children, please be sure to send them to the abandoned church at 673 White Sand Street before May 5 to confirm their mental status.

Father Duke”

Despite several deductions using the term “mental institution” before we know the church created White Sand Street Asylum, it is likely this wasn’t actually a “mental institution” back then. The beta letter to Kreacher states the kids should be sent “to the catholic church’s Office of Ministries for unified care”, with the location being “the abandoned church at 673 White Sand Street”. Another of Kreacher’s later deductions uses the term “church clinic”, and this is likely the more appropriate description.

One of the children in the care of the church’s clinic that partnered with Kreacher’s orphanage was Emma. Back then, she was still using her original name: Lisa Beck.

Leo Beck, the owner of a small textile factory, and Martha Remington (aka Martha Beck) married on March 14th, 1874 in Devonshire and gave birth to Lisa on December 21st, 1876.

Freddy is a lawyer and financial advisor specializing in “non-performing assets disposal, mergers, and acquisitions” that Leo became business partners with. Due to working with Leo, Freddy encounters Martha, who he falls in love with. Leo, still unaware of Freddy’s feelings for Martha, invites Freddy to Lisa’s 1st birthday because of their partnership that eventually becomes friendship. Once Lisa is older, she mentions Leo invited Freddy over more than once, with Freddy “always bringing flowers”.

Freddy, being part of the middle-class, was likely born into a not too badly off family, though not a rich one. Likely enough to live at least semi-comfortably compared to the lower classes. That’s likely why he was able to pay to attend school to become a lawyer. Despite this, none of his family are ever mentioned, which makes me wonder if they were a bit distant, potentially focusing on themselves or their own work rather than caring or showing much meaningful love to Freddy. In any case, Freddy still had high hopes. His social status and education had given him confidence, and he had high hopes for his future, with his goal always being to earn money and wealth (he was a “gold digger”). He might’ve thought things would be easy since his deduction 4 says “People tend to trust hard-workers. You need to seem hard working, at least”.

Despite his friendship with Leo, Freddy had fallen hard for Martha, who he saw as completely perfect and someone he couldn’t live without.

We know he wrote love letters to her frequently, including one in 1878 that shows just how head over heels he was for her. His desire to be with her despite the fact she was already with Leo was already very strong back then.

“Martha:

You said that you fear I can’t give you the sort of love you hope for? My beloved lady, I swear on Gowd’s name that my love for you has no reservations.

My love for you burns so brightly that day and night, I am unable to sleep. When I think about your family, my heart suffers from the flames of envy. When will you be able to reciprocate my feelings?

Loving you

Freddy Riley

1878”

This love doesn’t go away. His desire only burned brighter over time. Especially as Martha likely did return some of it, and if Freddy did grow up without being shown much love, he likely latched onto it like a starving man to food. This could be backed up by how Freddy in his diaries says “What do people do for love? Fresh flowers, love letters, vows, marriage. I made fun of it all in the past. Until I met you, Martha. After which, all of my principles, all my dignity, completely vanished.” This seems to imply Freddy looked down on and didn’t believe in the concept of “love”, which likely has several implications about his own family and how he grew up.

It makes me wonder if Freddy’s initial disregard towards love was because of his parents. Maybe his parents had a falling out, maybe they didn’t truly love each other, or maybe even 1 of them cheated on the other, which could explain why Freddy would mock even concepts like “vows” and marriage. Maybe his parents even divorced.

In any case, any of these sort of ideas would explain why Freddy’s parents are non-existent in his backstory as well as why he felt the way he did about love initially, not to mention if his parents weren’t happy with each other, or if they did cheat or at least didn’t have a happy marriage, that could imply Freddy wasn’t shown much love, and thus why when he did finally encounter someone he loved, why he might fall so far for that person.

Freddy was blinded by love as well as jealousy over Leo, someone he saw as beneath him due to Freddy’s feelings of “class superiority” (according to Freddy’s 3rd letter). Yet despite this, Leo had a more successful and happier life than Freddy, which leads to him developing deep resentment towards Leo and eventually to begin planning a way to have Martha all to himself.

I wonder if it’s possible the reason why Freddy might see what he’s doing as ok could have been because of his own parents, as in if they really did break their marriage vows or even cheat on each other despite their marriage. Maybe that could be partially why Freddy didn’t care as much that Martha was already married.

We know Freddy continued to woo Martha, before eventually proposing to her. This happened some time before Lisa had even turned 8 or 9 years old. We know Freddy didn’t force Martha, only tried to win her over. Martha obviously was tempted, which leads to her and Leo arguing more and more. Lisa said that her mother told Leo that his “clothes were always dirty”, while Freddy was always a clean looking “young gentleman with a suit and shiny hair”. Leo was the owner of a small factory, while Freddy was a financial advisor (and potentially of a higher class based on Freddy’s 3rd letter mentioning his feelings of class superiority). Considering Freddy saw himself as part of a “superior” class, I wonder if him being part of a higher class was partially why Martha was temped (why else call Leo “dirty”, especially when she’d been living with him for some time and knew why he was “always dirty”).

Leo doesn’t comment though. He knew just as well as Martha that this wasn’t something he could help since he had to work at his textile factory. It never bothered him though. All that mattered was taking care of his family. So he let Martha criticize him without saying any such harsh words back at her.

According to the Christmas event, Emma didn’t really understand who Freddy was, referring to him as “that man” that she “didn’t like”, as well as “an uncle who wore glasses” that her mother took her with one time to see a play. Freddy was likely the one to take Martha to see the play as part of him trying to be with Martha. Emma said she “didn’t really get it and I wasn’t in the mood anyway”, with her main concern that she wishes Leo had been there with her.

Considering Leo’s failure to attend, it is possible he knew Martha was spending more and more time with Freddy. Leo was a trusting man, so I don’t think he even allowed the thought that Freddy was doing this to win Martha over from him. He didn’t like it, but I don’t think he could ever tell her no. Even though they were arguing at this time, I believe he still wanted her to be happy, and hoped with some time apart after their argument, things would get better.

Some time before the proposal, Freddy (as a financial advisor partnered with Leo) suggests to Leo that he invest in Minerva Arms Factory. Martha was concerned and asked for Freddy to be honest regarding whether this was a “good investment plan”, to which Freddy responds by saying “if the investor had sufficient experience and capital, this would bring him immense wealth”. Martha initially trusts him (though still believes it would be better Leo didn’t invest in the arms factory).

It's at this point that Martha leaves Leo and Lisa. It is also described as a “secret departure” with the description “Leave before they notice and maybe then you can avoid heartbreak”. Before leaving, the last word she says to Lisa is “sorry” (she likely saw her mother before she could completely sneak away, probably when Leo was working before he could return). This to me, combined with her actions, shows us that Martha didn’t love Lisa nearly as much as Leo did (or rather that there were other things she loved more).

She does leave a letter for Leo, informing him of what she was doing even though “I know I'm about to do something really bad”.

In her goodbye letter to Leo, she says “For the sake of Lisa, however, please consider carefully the investment we debated” and tells him she hopes “you will make a wise decision”. If they “debated” this topic before, and Martha is saying to consider it carefully for Lisa’s sake, I wonder if that was part of the reason why Leo and Martha were “quarreling”. Maybe Leo was arguing that he believed he should invest in the factory while Martha tried to argue against it, and their arguing over it was part of the reason Martha decided to say yes to Freddy.

Near the end of her letter, she tells Leo “Take care of Lisa, and find a more suitable woman for yourself” (find a “more suitable woman for yourself” makes me wonder as to the meaning of these words. Considering Freddy sees himself as of a “superior” class, maybe she means “suitable” as in someone of a more appropriate class for Leo, while she wanted to be with the higher class. Or maybe she’s saying suitable because, just like how she’s doing something bad, she wants him to find a woman who is more faithful than she is). Then, just like with Lisa, she tells him “I’m really sorry” (I wonder how sorry she really is because, if she truly meant those words, would she still have left them?).

Even more symbolic is how she closes the letter with “Martha Remington” instead of “Martha Beck”.

In any case, Martha is gone, leaving Leo and Lisa to fend for themselves.

Based on how Martha describes Leo as someone who “wasn’t smart” and “didn’t have any investment experience, not to mention capital”, I wonder if Leo was someone who grew up without a formal education like Freddy had. Leo may have been more of a self-made man, someone who might’ve come from a poorer, simpler background but managed to make a living due to his personal characteristics and hard work. He wasn’t a rich man, only the owner of a small textile factory, but he was happy and made the most of it.

We know from Emma during the Christmas Nocturne (2020) event that Leo was good with his hands, as we learn he used fabric from his textile factory to make her dolls (including 1 of Emma herself). He’d made 2 “bodyguards” for her doll, but Emma says she was never able to see them (likely the 2 dolls Leo uses in game, and Emma likely didn’t see them because that may have been when she was sent to the orphanage or when Leo died).

We can see from Leo’s accessories that he’s made her other toys as well (including a slingshot and a hot air balloon model). The descriptions for these accessories tell us that Leo loved Emma. She was his world, and he’d do anything for her.

The Christmas event informs us of the same thing. Emma tells us that she’d always get 2 presents from him on Christmas. 1 was her birthday present, on December 21st, and another was a Christmas present, but he’d hide her birthday present until Christmas, and put both of them under the tree for her.

For the last Christmas Emma had with her father, he told her “this little tree of yours will be filled with so many presents next year that I won’t be able to see your little face”, which shows how much he wanted to do for her (if he’d been able).

We don’t know how long Leo and Lisa lived on their own, but we do know Leo did end up buying the Arms factory, and it was some time after doing so he learned that the factory had an over “4-figure debt”. Even Martha in her letter to Freddy says, despite how “Leo wasn’t smart”, she states “Yet even the dumbest person knows not to spend money to take on extra debts”, which tells us Freddy, who knew about the factory’s debt, purposefully hid this fact from Leo. This is evident as Freddy, in his deduction “Covert Jealousy” mentioning how he cut Leo out of the picture of him with Martha and Lisa, states “He should disappear from here or not appear before my eyes again”, while the very next deduction about the Factory and its debt is titled “False Affection”, with the description including “Lend a helping hand for greater profit, not brotherhood.”

We know Leo did what he could despite the debts, as Emma during the Christmas event says he sometimes came back with a “semi-finished gun made in his factory”. Emma didn’t like the guns, instead preferring the dolls Leo used to make, which he likely stopped doing once he’d incurred the debt from the factory (I wonder if he had to sell the textile factory to try to help pay off the debt for the arms factory).

Lisa seems to have occasionally gone with him to the arms factory, potentially because he couldn’t leave her at home by herself or because he had to work extra long in an attempt to pay off the debt.

This debt puts an incredible strain on Leo, which causes him to begin to change from the person Lisa originally remembered him as. He starts drinking (to forget the pain and sorrows of reality) as well as selling items from their home (to help pay off the debt. He also might’ve “destroyed” items that used to belong to Martha in drunken fits of rage). Lisa describes her emotions at that time as “I don't know what has happened, but this feeling is awful”.

Unfortunately, Leo is no longer capable of caring for Lisa due to the fact he is drowning in debt, especially now that he’s begun spending some of their money on drink. As a result, he’s forced to send her to an orphanage while she’s around 8 years old.

We know Leo married Martha in “Devonshire”, meaning that’s also where they likely lived. Freddy’s business was also in Devonshire, with the specific stress being “583 White Sand Street, Devonshire”.

This means Leo and Freddy lived close by (and I imagine Leo’s textile factory wasn’t too far away either). It also means that they lived on the same street as Kreacher’s orphanage, which was “13 White Sand Street”. Kreacher’s advertisement says this is the “first orphanage on White Sand Street”, and if he was the first and thus only one on the street, it’d make sense that Emma wouldn’t have much choice but to be sent to his.

Sometime after Lisa was sent to the orphanage, Leo sets the Arms Factory on fire. Based on the fact that Leo’s 3rd letter takes place on December 21, 1897 and the fact it says Leo has been experimented on for 10 years, with the experiments on Leo likely starting right after the factory fire, the fire itself had to have started on December 21, 1887, on Emma’s 11th birthday.

According to a letter he sent to Lisa before this (Leo’s 2nd Letter), we know Leo intended to have Lisa receive the insurance money from the factory fire, as she is listed as the “beneficiary of compensation”. He basically explains in the letter his desperation to find “another way to make money”, as nothing he’s been able to do as been enough to settle the debts. Though as we never hear about Emma receiving this money, it’s possible there was an issue (such as she wasn’t of age yet).

Despite what he’s about to do, we can see once again that Leo is doing everything for her. He still worries about Lisa being fed enough and being kept warm. He also reassured Lisa so she didn’t think that she was “unwanted”, and informed her that her mother leaving had nothing to do with Lisa herself. He ends by warning her “not to trust people too easily. Live for yourself. You won’t get lucky by being nice. It took Father too long to learn this lesson”. This seems to show Leo has realized that Freddy tricked him, as well as show Leo changing further to no longer be the kind, trusting person he once was. Considering he calls himself a “useless Father”, this tells us how Leo feels about himself regarding his inability to sufficiently care for his daughter, as well as proves what his primary concern has always been.

Despite the fire, Leo survives but hides while he recuperates, making everyone think he’s dead. Due to the fact one of the walls says “I will find you” as well as based on Leo’s deduction summary stating he “brewed his own revenge plan”, we know Leo’s focus right now is to get revenge on Freddy.

At some point before he can do so, he was taken to Sacred Heart Hospital and used as an experiment. These experiments included memory erasure, forcing him to forget so Leo would stop getting “uncontrollably excited” on Emma’s birthday to ensure the “daily experiments” went more “easily”. Leo’s 3rd letter states that the experiments went on for 10 years. Whether Orpheus was the one to take Leo or not, we know Leo was definitely used by Orpheus during Emma’s game to punish those who broke the rules, as well as used as the hunter for Emma’s game. And considering some “mysterious man learned that ‘Cinder’ is alive and where he can be found”, someone that has been “writing more frequently these days”, a someone that is male based on “his probing”, it is more likely Orpheus is this other person that found out Leo was alive and likely blackmails the one who does currently have Leo to have him handed over (to Orpheus and the manor). Which just leaves the question of who is the author of Leo’s 3rd letter and the one who’s been experimenting on him for 10 years, which I’ll get into shortly.

Next: Asylum Analysis Part 2

(End: Asylum Analysis Part 3)

86 notes · View notes